Monday, 12 December 2011

FILICIDE: by animals

Female polar bear Aurora killed two of her cubs in October and had a third one taken away. She has been at the Toronto zoo since 2001.

STEVE RUSSELL/TORONTO STAR FILE PHOTO

Are they bad mothers for abandoning, injuring, or even killing their newborns?
Take Aurora, the popular female polar bear at the Toronto zoo, for example. She killed two of her cubs in October, and had a third one taken away by zoo staff for hand-rearing to prevent a similar fate. She did the same thing the year prior, killing two of her cubs at birth by partially eating them.
It is well known that males will attack or eat their young and others, but mothers failing to care for their young, and animal infanticide in general is a touchy, almost taboo subject for major zoos, including Toronto’s. After all it doesn’t exactly drive attendance.
Yet it’s a phenomenon staff deal with and one that can be traumatizing for zookeepers, say Toronto zoo officials.
“It’s not uncommon, even with domestic animals. Some mothers just aren’t good (at being) mothers,” explains Dr. Graham Crawshaw, the Toronto zoo’s senior veterinarian.
“Anyone who works with wild animals knows this isn’t uncommon or a reflection on this zoo, or zoos generally. It’s animals. Some animals do better than others. You can’t predict,” explained Crawshaw, who was reticent to discuss the issue with the Star.
Infanticide in the wild is common and occurs for a variety of reasons, says Mark Fitzpatrick assistant professor in the biology department at the University of Toronto, and an expert in animal behaviour, mating and aggression.
For example, in the case of lions, a new male might take over a pride and kill all the offspring.
“That will reset all the females into estrous, and he can maximize his reproductive success by mating with those females. That sort of scenario also happens with Colobine monkeys,’’ says Fitzpatrick.
But such behaviour is typically driven by male aggression, he says.
“Males are more likely to do the killing. With females it’s less common,” Fitzpatrick says.
One theory found in scientific literature on parental infanticide suggests it’s part of “normal’’ maternal behaviour where a female can adjust her litter size to suit her ability to raise offspring. Or, as Fitzpatrick notes, the female may do it because she simply wants to mate with a new male.
Animal rights activists charge that captivity is a major source of anxiety causing females to destroy their young.
“I think it’s fair to say that in most cases of infanticide, it’s related to stressors, whether it’s in the wild or in captivity,’’ says Zoocheck Canada director Julie Woodyer.
She says zoos claim that when the keep animals in captivity they’ve removed “stressors’’ that animals would face in the wild, such as lack of food.
“One of the primary reasons polar bears would kill their own cubs in the wild is because there isn’t enough food even for them to eat,’’ says Woodyer.
But this problem doesn’t exist in captivity, she says, yet moms such as Aurora are still experiencing difficulties rearing offspring, Woodyer notes.
“Once you remove those stressors these problems shouldn’t exist, but they do because zoos have created different kinds of stressors for the animals because they haven’t evolved to cope in that small environment. Polar bears are wide ranging carnivores that don’t do well when you confine them,’’ Woodyer argues.
To learn more about infanticide and maternal care issues with polar bears, the Toronto zoo is collecting the animals’ fecal and urine samples and trying to get a handle on their reproductive cycles and pregnancy.
Toronto is working with other zoos, which in turn are collaborating with biologists and researchers working in the wild. There are challenges however to studying maternal care in the wild because of the secretive nature of den sites for polar bears and other species.
Crawshaw argues one theory cannot fully explain infanticide and failure to rear issues involving females. He believes it’s largely tied to the disposition of the individual creature.
To make his point he describes the unusual maternal care case with Nokanda, the late female white lion who abandoned six of her cubs.
On two separate occasions she abandoned her newborns immediately after zoo staff separated them from her to do veterinary checks to ensure the offspring were healthy.
“(The first time) we put them back with her … she never touched the cubs again ... She didn’t want anything to do with them. That was enough disturbance for her,’’ explains Crawshaw.
Zoo staff have separated moms from their cubs — other lions, tigers, cheetahs etc. — and those moms were absolutely fine once their pups were returned, he says.
In the second batch the following year, Toronto zoo staff waited 10 weeks before vaccinating the other set of Nokanda’s cubs — she’d been a good mother to them up to that point.
“We took them out, gave them their shots, checked them out (but) she never touched them again. That was that animal. We had to feed them. Now they’re big strapping animals.
“Again, each animal is different,’’ says Crawshaw.
As for Aurora, she was an inexperienced mom the first time she had babies, Crawshaw said, and was in an unfamiliar environment in the zoo’s new enclosure.
Aurora came to the zoo in 2001 after she and sister Nikita, both cubs at the time, were found wandering the wilderness alone, their mom apparently shot by a hunter. They were loaned to a polar bear habitat in Northern Ontario, and returned to Toronto in 2009.
In the past the zoo has had other polar bears who failed to raise their young, staff say.
Troubled mothers at the Toronto Zoo• Female polar bear Aurora killed two of her cubs in October and had a third one taken away. She did the same thing in 2010, killing two newborn cubs.
• Tatiana, a Siberian tiger, gave birth to two cubs in 2000. One was found dead, the other alive but missing a leg that had been bitten off by mom. The cub was euthanized.
• Nokanda, a female white lion that passed away this summer, gave birth to four cubs in 1999 and two the following year, and abandoned all of them. Three in the first litter died, and one needed to be hand-reared. Two in the second litter required hand-rearing.
• Erin, a Himalayan tahr (wild goat), abandoned one of her two surviving babies, which needed to be hand-reared.
http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1100493--when-moms-kill-their-young

1 comment:

Filicide in the animal kingdom occurring in animals is tied much more to a parental response to the perception of resources required and available for the investment of the massive amounts of energy required in raising viable members of their species. The litter size needs to be realistic, so some may need to be culled. The progency must seem healthy with no apparent significant disabilities or disorders. There are signs that indicate an environment that will provide the needs in food, shelter and be free from diseases. That's where captivity may not convice some species through olfactory and visual cues that getting food and no deseases is a guarantee plus not seeing the right training ground for what the mother thinks ahe needs to teach for her proginy to be fully viable.Cubs and kittens need to be taught how to hunt various prey, identify and evade predators efficiently and proper social interactions of their species. There will always be degrees of individual differences amongst animals sensity thresholds of when it triggers a reaction of abandoning or killing their own young.

Humans are not that much different, except for two critical areas. In a sense we have overlapping litter situations because our young are dependant for so long. That means the mother may execute children that had a viable potential because the next litter item is from another environmental context. The other difference is we are greatly regulated by existing social rules and practices. It means many a mother has suppressed filicide when deficits in proginey and environment elicit this with social sanctions being a far stronger deterrent and restraint. Humans can also follow practices such as substance abuse that create imbalanced patterns of processing and self cantered living freeing them from all kinds of constraints wether innate caring tendencies or external social sanctions. Furthermore our medical progress means a proportion of persons devolve with endocrinal, cognitive and other deficits breeding though more vulnerable to inadequately parent so altering even further neurological systems of their young to parent effectively. The stimuli for infanticide as a result in humans become distorted. I'd claim that it really is abnormal the sanctions constraining infanticide of developmentally disabled progeny with no prospect of developing properly while depleting resources of others lives and it is often those who succumb to those pressures that are punished by society through lacking the capacity to conceal such being so overwhelmed by the pressures endured. The remainder of infanticide occurrences result from actual endocrine disorders of the mother distorting her perceptions or coping with pressures and other forms are a result of parental deficits in the context of parents who prioratise their own personal agendas. This latter group are the ones most adept in concealment and the most likely ones to escape deserved sentencing in using skills of boundry breaking while evading consequences practised throughout their life in other social dealings. There are a small minority who may experience a psychotic mental illness episode who react to distorted perceptions killing infants and children without any normal frame of reference fitting the truly insane criteria. Likewise an ill equiped intellectually disabled mother reacting as to any other threatening pressure to the demands of an infant. Society created a level of sanctions for infanticide did so that sufficient functioning members would reach adulthood to contribute to strengthening their social group recognising infants make essential but unpleasant demands of sacrifice from their parents who whilst in the main could be nurturing would face taxing times but control reactive frustrations guided by social expectations and fear of punishments.

About Me

After service in the British SAS Regiment the author became a physician and then an orthopaedic surgeon.
He has held professorial positions in Canada, Vietnam and the United States, practiced and taught orthopaedic surgery in three continents and in several wars.
He has extensive experience as an expert witness in court. Somewhere along the way, time was found to operate a four hundred acre mixed farm, a one hundred seat restaurant and to obtain a licence as a flying instructor.
The author's books are available from bookstores, the publishers, or from on-line bookstores such as Amazon, Barnes and Noble, and Indigo/Chapters.
http://mclementhall.com